MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: 2014 by Shutterstock Founder (previously Bravo Shutterstock)  (Read 28418 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« Reply #50 on: January 06, 2015, 23:20 »
0


PLUS they send out paid "sock puppet, fan-boys" trolling forums spreading cockeyed nonsense about the splendor of a business model that pays third-world sweat shop wages/commissions to hard working artist/photographers -- because they can.

SSArtist -- we are not a bunch of gullible, young yeehaa hayseeds misinformed of the reality of the micro and mid-stock industry. This is the wrong forum for your pollyanna optimism and PR con job. If anything, your thread is backfiring on you and your employer (shutterstock). Nice try. ::)

Your first name must be Sherlock cuz I bet you solved this mystery.  Wish I could plus you more than just +1.  You are so right.

« Last Edit: January 06, 2015, 23:24 by PixelBytes »


Uncle Pete

« Reply #51 on: January 07, 2015, 00:36 »
+3
Unless it's someone just playing the fool to create discussion. I don't believe that they are real or sincere.

I gotta admit, SSArtist is the first artist or contrbutor I can remember thats so excited about not getting a raise and so eager on making up reasons we should not have one.

« Reply #52 on: January 07, 2015, 01:09 »
-5
Because they perform better than others, we need to turn a blind eye? Questioning Shutterstock is not allowed because they do well?

Of course we should not turn blind eye and of course questioning Shutterstock or any other agency is allowed.

But saying thank you and bravo is allowed too, as these guys are feeding us along with 500 people who work for Shutterstock.

I wanted to be grateful this time of year, and before you jump to attack me again, please look at my previous posts (#21 ...) where I also voted for a raise.

Have a great day you ALL!  :)

It would be nice to have moderators to protect me from bullying, personal attacks, labeling, twisting my words and lies that some members spread around here.
Anyone brave enough to say something and stop this ganging?
« Last Edit: January 07, 2015, 02:02 by SSContributor »

« Reply #53 on: January 07, 2015, 01:52 »
+6
Because they perform better than others, we need to turn a blind eye? Questioning Shutterstock is not allowed because they do well?

Yes they do well, but with an ever increasing cost for production because of their demand of a certain level of quality, it would be only fair to compensate for that increased cost. Days of selling snaps from dusty HDs are long gone, the demand for quality has risen. A demand raised by the agency.

They used to sell this for 20 cent



Now they sell this for 25 cent




Ron, in case I didn't say before, it's real nice to have you back on msg.  Great post.





...same here - I m glad ron is back ....

« Reply #54 on: January 07, 2015, 03:58 »
+7
Oh i like this discussion a lot.
It's always nice to see that there will always be proletarians,who shout in defense of big undustries' ethics whose true value is (historically in capitalism) only reflected on the 6 figures their
golden boys earn from all of us.
But it's ok.If i was a big company shamelessly announcing profits in my blog and had the last wheel of the wagon cheering me on my success i would propably consider to pay him less next time,certainly not more.
Now let us all pray for the stock industry to thrive,even if it means less and less for us.

« Reply #55 on: January 07, 2015, 04:23 »
+16
I don't think SSartist is anything to do with the agency, I think he is just still in the Woo-Yay phase because he is selling some images. Weren't we all there once (at least, all of us who started selling through microstock, rather than coming to it from another photographic background)?

« Reply #56 on: January 07, 2015, 06:34 »
+3
Because they perform better than others, we need to turn a blind eye? Questioning Shutterstock is not allowed because they do well?

Of course we should not turn blind eye and of course questioning Shutterstock or any other agency is allowed.

But saying thank you and bravo is allowed too, as these guys are feeding us along with 500 people who work for Shutterstock.

I wanted to be grateful this time of year, and before you jump to attack me again, please look at my previous posts (#21 ...) where I also voted for a raise.

Have a great day you ALL!  :)

It would be nice to have moderators to protect me from bullying, personal attacks, labeling, twisting my words and lies that some members spread around here.
Anyone brave enough to say something and stop this ganging?

That's what I love about people like you ~ you go on the internet and pontificate about all that is holy and true (in your world view) then as soon as anyone has the temerity to disagree you start squealing "foul" and "bullying" and the powers that be must "protect" me.

When really what you are doing is playing a nasty game with contributors then trying to "censor" any view that does not correspond with yours.

Have you heard the saying "sticks and stones"? Grow some!

« Reply #57 on: January 07, 2015, 06:55 »
0
Because they perform better than others, we need to turn a blind eye? Questioning Shutterstock is not allowed because they do well?
Of course we should not turn blind eye and of course questioning Shutterstock or any other agency is allowed.

But saying thank you and bravo is allowed too, as these guys are feeding us along with 500 people who work for Shutterstock.

I wanted to be grateful this time of year, and before you jump to attack me again, please look at my previous posts (#21 ...) where I also voted for a raise.

Have a great day you ALL!  :)

It would be nice to have moderators to protect me from bullying, personal attacks, labeling, twisting my words and lies that some members spread around here.
Anyone brave enough to say something and stop this ganging?

That's what I love about people like you ~ you go on the internet and pontificate about all that is holy and true (in your world view) then as soon as anyone has the temerity to disagree you start squealing "foul" and "bullying" and the powers that be must "protect" me.

When really what you are doing is playing a nasty game with contributors then trying to "censor" any view that does not correspond with yours.

Have you heard the saying "sticks and stones"? Grow some!

I have no idea why you have a need to polarize us here, when we ALL indeed in the same basket?!? Please read my posts and stop putting words into my mouth.
Calling me names, suggesting that I work for SS and being plain rude is NOT going to bring good to any of us. It's just a time waste, imho.



Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #58 on: January 07, 2015, 07:37 »
+7
They have no reason to pay anybody more. They are making all the right moves for their company, investors, and destroying the competition. They get to work in a swanky ultra expensive NY office building and employees get all kinds of benefits. Execs are rolling in money.

All of this while they pay their contributors pennies per sale and contributors sing love songs about them. Why would they pay any more?

It really is a brilliant business model.

PLUS they send out paid "sock puppet, fan-boys" trolling forums spreading cockeyed nonsense about the splendor of a business model that pays third-world sweat shop wages/commissions to hard working artist/photographers -- because they can.

SSArtist -- we are not a bunch of gullible, young yeehaa hayseeds misinformed of the reality of the micro and mid-stock industry. This is the wrong forum for your pollyanna optimism and PR con job. If anything, your thread is backfiring on you and your employer (shutterstock). Nice try. ::)

I can't stand that wooyay attitude either, but do you honestly believe SS needs to send in some employer to try and convince us of their superiority? As if SS has sleepless nights about a few microstockers demanding a raise. This is just a fanboy acting on his own, not some PR job.

« Reply #59 on: January 07, 2015, 07:56 »
0
Because they perform better than others, we need to turn a blind eye? Questioning Shutterstock is not allowed because they do well?
Of course we should not turn blind eye and of course questioning Shutterstock or any other agency is allowed.

But saying thank you and bravo is allowed too, as these guys are feeding us along with 500 people who work for Shutterstock.

I wanted to be grateful this time of year, and before you jump to attack me again, please look at my previous posts (#21 ...) where I also voted for a raise.

Have a great day you ALL!  :)

It would be nice to have moderators to protect me from bullying, personal attacks, labeling, twisting my words and lies that some members spread around here.
Anyone brave enough to say something and stop this ganging?

That's what I love about people like you ~ you go on the internet and pontificate about all that is holy and true (in your world view) then as soon as anyone has the temerity to disagree you start squealing "foul" and "bullying" and the powers that be must "protect" me.

When really what you are doing is playing a nasty game with contributors then trying to "censor" any view that does not correspond with yours.

Have you heard the saying "sticks and stones"? Grow some!

I have no idea why you have a need to polarize us here, when we ALL indeed in the same basket?!? Please read my posts and stop putting words into my mouth.
Calling me names, suggesting that I work for SS and being plain rude is NOT going to bring good to any of us. It's just a time waste, imho.

No one has called you names ~ and stop trying the "you have a need to polarize US here" there is no US you are the one who dived in here with your "Woo Hoo" attitude

You are obviously in here as a "flamer" go find some other forum to disrupt  ::)

Snow

« Reply #60 on: January 07, 2015, 08:05 »
+3
@SSartist,

Why did you use SSArtist and now SSContributor as your nick in the first place? Not that you haven't got the right to do so but there wasn't any other name left to pick? Would you prefer if we all changed our names to ISArtist, DTContributor. Wouldn't that be great in an independent discussion forum! Would really up the standards here no?
Ask yourself how you would react to a person called IScontributor who does nothing but preaching about the agency while taking down all others? and please don't act like you haven't done so. If you want to blame someone for the harsh critics you have received so far you can blame yourself.
If there is one thing we ALL know by now is that there is no holy grail in microstock! preaching about one particular agency is truly a waste of time!
That's it from my end. Take note or continue your crusade, all fine by me, good luck and take care whoever your are!

« Reply #61 on: January 07, 2015, 08:19 »
0
One got to laugh after all these useless exchanges.

I hope you all enjoyed reading SS Blog, as informative and interesting.

I won't post on this thread anymore....there is no point.

Love and peace to ALL!
 :)
« Last Edit: January 07, 2015, 08:34 by SSContributor »

« Reply #62 on: January 07, 2015, 08:23 »
0
Unless it's someone just playing the fool to create discussion. I don't believe that they are real or sincere.

I gotta admit, SSArtist is the first artist or contrbutor I can remember thats so excited about not getting a raise and so eager on making up reasons we should not have one.

That was my thought, too, Pete.

Snow

« Reply #63 on: January 07, 2015, 08:33 »
+4
Unless it's someone just playing the fool to create discussion. I don't believe that they are real or sincere.

I gotta admit, SSArtist is the first artist or contrbutor I can remember thats so excited about not getting a raise and so eager on making up reasons we should not have one.

That was my thought, too, Pete.

I normally wouldn't react but it's people like him/her that turn this forum into a bloody circus half the time which is a shame.

« Reply #64 on: January 07, 2015, 09:33 »
+3
I'm all for a raise* and I don't need to be convinced that SS can afford it. Problem is, any raise would no doubt beget demands for another and another and the cost would ultimately be met by the buyers not the shareholders. Whoever heard of a shareholder agreeing to a lower dividend just to keep suppliers/buyers or employees happy? Given that, I'd be interested to hear from anyone how an agency might reset buyer expectations in a market we helped the agencies create.

*At the very least a level or two above .38 cents to strive for.

« Reply #65 on: January 07, 2015, 10:11 »
-3
Unless it's someone just playing the fool to create discussion. I don't believe that they are real or sincere.

I gotta admit, SSArtist is the first artist or contrbutor I can remember thats so excited about not getting a raise and so eager on making up reasons we should not have one.
SSArtist/SSContributor sounds an awful lot like the Ron/Ponke/Semmick Photo from a few months ago, minus the emoticons of course.  I guess things have changed a lot since he was a SS ambassador or is he still doing that under another name?

PixelBytes, you may not remember but Ron has made some passionate arguments why SS should not give raises and how they already have so now they don't need to.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2015, 10:20 by tickstock »

ShadySue

« Reply #66 on: January 07, 2015, 10:28 »
+4
Unless it's someone just playing the fool to create discussion. I don't believe that they are real or sincere.

I gotta admit, SSArtist is the first artist or contrbutor I can remember thats so excited about not getting a raise and so eager on making up reasons we should not have one.
SSArtist/SSContributor sounds an awful lot like the Ron/Ponke/Semmick Photo from a few months ago, minus the emoticons of course.  I guess things have changed a lot since he was a SS ambassador or is he still doing that under another name?

Ron's back as Semmick Photo.


« Reply #67 on: January 07, 2015, 10:58 »
-2
Unless it's someone just playing the fool to create discussion. I don't believe that they are real or sincere.

I gotta admit, SSArtist is the first artist or contrbutor I can remember thats so excited about not getting a raise and so eager on making up reasons we should not have one.
SSArtist/SSContributor sounds an awful lot like the Ron/Ponke/Semmick Photo from a few months ago, minus the emoticons of course.  I guess things have changed a lot since he was a SS ambassador or is he still doing that under another name?

Ron's back as Semmick Photo.
I know he's back (he never really did leave though, did he?). 

« Reply #68 on: January 07, 2015, 11:33 »
-2
I gotta admit, SSArtist is the first artist or contrbutor I can remember thats so excited about not getting a raise and so eager on making up reasons we should not have one.

;) I have run into quite a few people on these boards that can come up with any number of reasons we do not deserve a raise. Ron being one of them.  I have never run into a business that seems to receive never ending passes for low pay, site technical issues etc.

I will agree it is nice to see a few more frogs jumping out of the boiling soup these days.

« Reply #69 on: January 07, 2015, 11:52 »
-2
Because they perform better than others, we need to turn a blind eye? Questioning Shutterstock is not allowed because they do well?

Yes they do well, but with an ever increasing cost for production because of their demand of a certain level of quality, it would be only fair to compensate for that increased cost. Days of selling snaps from dusty HDs are long gone, the demand for quality has risen. A demand raised by the agency.

They used to sell this for 20 cent



Now they sell this for 25 cent




Ron, in case I didn't say before, it's real nice to have you back on msg.  Great post.

I gotta admit, SSArtist is the first artist or contrbutor I can remember thats so excited about not getting a raise and so eager on making up reasons we should not have one.

STOP SPREADING LIES! I DID NOT SAY THAT!



« Reply #70 on: January 07, 2015, 11:55 »
-6
I gotta admit, SSArtist is the first artist or contrbutor I can remember thats so excited about not getting a raise and so eager on making up reasons we should not have one.

;) I have run into quite a few people on these boards that can come up with any number of reasons we do not deserve a raise. Ron being one of them.  I have never run into a business that seems to receive never ending passes for low pay, site technical issues etc.

I will agree it is nice to see a few more frogs jumping out of the boiling soup these days.

CAN ANYONE STOP THIS HATER SPEACH TOWARDS ME? STOP THIS BULLYING NOW. ARE THERE ANY MODERATORS HERE? 

« Reply #71 on: January 07, 2015, 12:00 »
-5
Because they perform better than others, we need to turn a blind eye? Questioning Shutterstock is not allowed because they do well?

Of course we should not turn blind eye and of course questioning Shutterstock or any other agency is allowed.

But saying thank you and bravo is allowed too, as these guys are feeding us along with 500 people who work for Shutterstock.

I wanted to be grateful this time of year, and before you jump to attack me again, please look at my previous posts (#21 ...) where I also voted for a raise.

Have a great day you ALL!  :)

It would be nice to have moderators to protect me from bullying, personal attacks, labeling, twisting my words and lies that some members spread around here.
Anyone brave enough to say something and stop this ganging?

I AM ASKING MODERATORS TO CLOSE THIS THREAD NOW, STOP BULLYING THAT IS HAPPENING WIHTOUT ANY REASON...STOP INVENTING POSTS I NEVER MADE! WHAT KIND OF SICK SOCIETY IS THIS?

« Reply #72 on: January 07, 2015, 12:34 »
+3
Whew!

« Reply #73 on: January 07, 2015, 12:41 »
+14
Come to mention it, did anyone get a Xmas card from them this year?

Not this year - last year I did. I guess I must have been on the naughty list? :)

I posted this before I read the remainder of this thread...a bit more heat than light...

However, regarding SS, they're producing earnings for us, but I don't have any especially warm feelings towards them as an agency.

Kudos for building up a business from scratch to a profitable public company, and having it continue to grow at a rate that Getty - whose chickens are coming home to roost, IMO - would envy (their revenues are falling).

Kudos for having a site that has probably the best uptime and no-drama-software-updates track record among the micros.

But they do the least they need to in order for the images to keep coming and don't really go the extra mile for contributors. They haven't explicitly cut our earnings, but they have avoided sharing any additional revenue with contributors where they can (flat rate for ELs that didn't go up when they offered more expensive small-volume EL packages, for example) and have refused anything even approaching transparency on the SOD licenses where we're supposed to be happy about bigger numbers without ever knowing what that license is for.

The introduction of BigStock subscriptions at rock bottom royalties with no opt out - cleverly silencing those in the Bridge program by paying them their SS 38 cents - was a disgrace, IMO, and I left BigStock after being refused an opt out. I'm glad they haven't ported that royalty scheme to SS, but as far as what I read here, these screw-the-contributor moves haven't set BigStock sales on fire, so I'm not sure what they got in return for the ill will that generated.

I recently watched a documentary about George Westinghouse, an inventor and industrialist from the age of the Robber Barons who built his many companies while still being very generous to his workers - much to the consternation of his fellow industrialists. You can be fair to suppliers and workers and still build successful businesses - even though that isn't the norm now and wasn't then either. I'm not willing to give SS a woo-yay just because they have done well by competing on price with the established robber baron (Getty) and built a profitable business from which I have benefitted.

SS deserves recognition for a significant accomplishment, but I'm not feeling the "Bravo" myself.
« Last Edit: January 07, 2015, 16:40 by Jo Ann Snover »

« Reply #74 on: January 07, 2015, 13:46 »
+1
I gotta admit, SSArtist is the first artist or contrbutor I can remember thats so excited about not getting a raise and so eager on making up reasons we should not have one.


;) I have run into quite a few people on these boards that can come up with any number of reasons we do not deserve a raise. Ron being one of them.  I have never run into a business that seems to receive never ending passes for low pay, site technical issues etc.

I will agree it is nice to see a few more frogs jumping out of the boiling soup these days.


CAN ANYONE STOP THIS HATER SPEACH TOWARDS ME? STOP THIS BULLYING NOW. ARE THERE ANY MODERATORS HERE? 



Calm down SSContributor my post was not directed at you.

I was thinking of threads like this and other threads that followed. http://www.microstockgroup.com/shutterstock-com/last-ss-raise-may-13-2008/

Per thread request - edited to reduce shout size
« Last Edit: January 07, 2015, 23:51 by gbalex »


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
1414 Views
Last post June 29, 2013, 13:22
by cathyslife
14 Replies
2563 Views
Last post December 03, 2013, 15:34
by JPSDK
11 Replies
3580 Views
Last post January 28, 2014, 00:32
by zeamonkey
52 Replies
8975 Views
Last post August 11, 2014, 12:16
by stryjek
92 Replies
12480 Views
Last post March 13, 2015, 11:04
by LesPalenik

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results